Re: [Patch,libgfortran & patch,fortran] Namelist (corrected)

[Bud Davis <bdavis at gfortran dot org>]

> 
> And I think we should maybe be more flexible after 4.0 goes out,
> we need this functionality and AFAICT the rest of gfortran is not
> perfect, so why should every proposed patch be?  As long as there
> is commitment to fix the remaining issues when largish patches
> like this one are checked in, we should IMHO just allow stuff in
> more quickly.
> 
> Gr.
> Steven
> 

my two cents on this topic:

this was too hard for Paul T to get approval.  

but, on the other hand, how can you be assured of the commitment to deal
with the issues ?  basically, i think someone who has been active on the
mailing list, who reports and fixes bugs, over a period of time would be
"safe"...they will probably deal with the problems that come up.

the problem is when someone just drops a 500 SLOC patch on the mailing
list and is gone...the contribution they make is valuable, but who is
going to deal with it when it is holding up a gcc release ?

tough calls to make, but important.

BTW, i have been pleasantly surprised on how well the new approval
policy has worked.  gfortran has been getting better and better, with no
downside noted.



--bud